tv Public Affairs Event CSPAN July 31, 2011 3:30am-6:00am EDT
that. the american people definitely don't want 5. the american people have clearly said that they want compromise. they want an honest effort to meet in the middle. sue from falcon heights is one of them. leader reid has responded to the pleas of the american people by offering us a sensible compromise. i urge my colleagues to be statesmen for the sake of the country. please, come to the table. we are trying to work with you. for the sake of the country, the clock is ticking. thank you, mr.ught out in the debate. when washington says it's going to cut spending, it's untruthful with the american public. because both the boehner bill
and the reid bill increase discretionary spending over the next 10 years by one of them $830 billion and the other $832 billion. how is it that we can with a straight face in this body talk about a cut when in fact we're going to -- and c.b.o. says we're going to actually increase the spending in the discretionary accounts over the next 10 years nearly a trillion dollars. and you've heard the debate in the house, in the senate of a sput. and of course, that goes to what the heart of the problem is in our country. is words get twisted around to the advantage of the politicians, but to the disadvantage of the american citizens. we are in trouble financially. most people agree with that.
we have programs that are in difficult straits. as a matter of fact, they're broke. they'r not just in difficult straits. here's the ones that are broke. medicare part a trust fund, worst case scenario, this year, 2016. that's the fund that solves and pays for hospitalizations for our seniors. now, we've heard a lot of statements said about medicare. the average medicare recipient paid $130,000 into medicare. the average medicare recipient takes $350,000 out. how long do you think that can continue? how long can we continue to tell seniors that we can continue a program based on its utilization rates, based on itsriermt rates, based on the tax rates,
that has a $22000 difference between what goes out in benefits and what comes in? it's broke. medicaid is broke. the reason it's broke, because the states are broke trying to take care of it. we mandate what they must do, and yet the stas are choking on medicaid. and we're choking on matching the amount of dollars. and und the affordable care act, it is now estimated 25 million more people will go into medicaid. so it's broke the census. it was broke before it started. cost twice what it did 10 years ago. $8 billion more than what was estimated. fanny and freddy, we know they're broke. $190 billion you have now committed for to pay to get them out of the hock. congress created that. $190 billion and that is where
we are today. it's going to be $300 billion or $400 billion that we will have to pay. social security. people say it's not broke. we have $2.5 trillion worth of i.o.u.'s. the fact is that that money's gone, congress stole it, spent it on oer things and now we lack the ability to go into international financial markets to borrow that money to put that trust fund whole. so why do we need to reform social security? so we can make sure it's there in the future. what we did know is in 2032 now, according to the trustees that everybody on social security will only get 77% of what they're promised and every year after that it will decline. so that when my kids are on social security, they will get about 40% of what the average social security recipient gets now. and we know we can fix it and we know we can fix it and make it sustainable forever.
but we won't do that because that's politically difficult. the u.s. post office is bleeding every day. yet we haven't fixed it. we're going to do a gimmick to buy it some time. but the fact is, is we've set it up under a system wn they negotiate labor contracts under the arbitration system they can't consider the financial health of the post office. that would be like paying somebody to mow your grass and saying they'll set the price on it, and you can't negotiate what the price is. and yet they're going to lose $8 billion to $10 billion this year and more every year going forward. and yet we've not fixed it, not done anything. cash for clunkers. absolute, when you look at the dollars, and the homebuyer program, new homebuyer program, theyctually had a negative effect on the economy. that's what the studies show now. so we blew all through all that ney.
the highway trust fund. what is used to build highways and roads and bridges in our country is broke. we're looking for $13 billion to try to make it whole and all we did was transfer the last three years to that, rather than reform it,e didn't do anything about it. the new government-run health care programs. here's what we know. is the new studies show that over half of the employers in this country will drop their insurance for the people who presently have insurance at work. hundreds of billions of dollars of additional taxpayer money are going to be required to subsidize the exchanges that those people are going to go into. because the penalty for dropping somebody's insurance is economically too low to keep employers from doing that. so we have all these programs that are broke, and we have a discussion about the debt ceiling, but we're not talking about what the real problem is.
is this government is twice the size itas 10 years ago. twice as big. and it would be great if all of it was constitutional, it could be great it was if it was all effective, if it was efficient and it would be great if we could afford it. but t fact is we're where we are today with $1.6 trillion deficits because we can't afford the government we have. and so we've not concentrated on the very areas where we can find mutual agreement, we've had three bipartisan bills in here where we've cut money, significant money, a billion here, $5 billion here, $7 billion here, go through the senate with vast majority votes only to go nowhere. because the allowance for the debate on the underlying bills was stopped. the bills were pulled. so what do we do? well, the first thing we do is
we lookt what the problems are. what are the problems? we have a hundred different programs with a hundred sets of bureaucracies for surface transportation alone. why do we do that? why haven't we fixed it? that's a question the american people ought to be asking. we have 82 programs to improve the quality of our teachers run by the federal government across seven different agencies. only one ofhem is the department of education. why are we doing that? where is the assessment of how well they work? where is the metrics to say we should be spending this money in this way because we're getting return? not one of them has a metric on it. not one of them has ever been measured of whether or not it's effective. we have 88 economic development programs in four agencies for which we spend $6.8 billion and we have another 100 economic development programs in six other agencies for which we spent another $4 billion and not one of them has ever been measured to see does it improve
economic activity. and if in fact it does, why do we have 188? separate agencies to speculate economic development. i mean this isn't complicated stuff. it's common sense. every american other than the congress would fix that. we have 56 programs to teach financial literacy to the american people. first of all, i'd question whether or not we ought to be teaching anybody financial literacy as a govnment when we run so poorly. but if in fact we do, why do we have 56 and, oh, by the way, not o of them has ever been measured to see if it effectively teaches somebody financial late reas. we have 47 job training programs, cost $18 billion a year, nine different agencies, nine different sets of bureaucracies, and all of them but three overlap with the other. that's according to the government accountability office. why?
why would we do that? we have 18 programs for food for the hungry. that's something we all want to be involved in. 18? why 18 sets of bureaucracies? how well are they working? are they effective? could we do them better? the question hasn't been been asked by congress. we have homess programs for both prevention and assistance, 20. six different agencies. so you have 20 different sets of bureaucracies that are designed to do the same thing. disaster response and preparedness, inside fema alone , inside fema alone we have 17 different programs. inside that one agency which is part of the department of homeland security. i asked the question why? why has it been a priority for us to work on those? why would you do?
a senator: would the senator be willing to yield for a colloquy? it may surprise the senator, i hope not. but it might surprise some people listening to this. mr. kerry: to hr from this have side of the aisle a lot of people here have enormous respect for what the senator has been talking about and fighting for and what he has achieved. and i might add he is one of those courageous senators who has come together in the last months, working months as part of the so-called gang of six, to try to bridge the gap here. and see if we can't find a way forward. and as i listened to him, there's an enormous amount of common sense in the questions that he's asking. these are questions all of us need to join into, and we need to join into them in a process that allows us to be able to fairly and in a balanced way work on the grand bargain, as
you call it, the big fix. now, i'd a the senator, because i think a lot of americans listening to this debate -- i've been listening to it somewhat on the floor, sowhat back in theffice -- and i think people have got to be saying to themselves, these guys areind of talking past each other or something's being miss here, because you hear this side, some things sound reasonable, you hear reasonable things over here. so people say what's hanging up this process? why is the entire country being held hostage here? so i'd like to help my colleague if he'd kind of help us bear down on what we need to do here. and i'd ask him if it isn't fair and accurate to say that the so-called gang of six -- terrible name, i think, maybe we call them the g-6 -- came together with an understanding that we needed balance in the approach to satisfy both sides and build a critical mass. and that balance required cuts.
you have to put the big items, the big-ticket items on the table. that meansixing social security, reforming it for the long term, medicare, medicaid, unsustainable on the current paths. defense, we've got to find a handle on some of the procurement and expenditures. but we also -- and i think the senator joined in this -- have to close some tax loopholes and have tax reform and find some level of revenue at an appropriate ratio that allows us to fix this. and that's where the problem has been, that there are a group of folks over in the house who have just insisted no revenue at all. and what i'd a the senator, isn't it fair t say that the gang of six came up with a sort of more balanced approach on which i believe the senate could find the ground of compromise? what senator reid has proposed i
believe has cuts that republicans have supported. maybe not quite enough yet so maybe we can negotiate that. mr. coburn: let me reclaim my time. mr. kerry: absolutely. mr. coburn: therere absolutely no cuts in either what senator reid or speaker boehner proposed in the discretionary spending. the spending will rise $832 billion over the next two years -- ten years in the discretionary accounts. now, only in washington is that a cut. and, quite frankly, i'm willing to work with my colleagues. i've been out there. i say we have to move and eliminatsome of these loopholes, that we have to reform the tax code. m willing to take the heat from my side on that. i don't have any problem. what i'm not willing to take any more is a senate that won't work on the details of the specific problems. and what i'm trying to do is to outline where the problems are. where is the --nd we didn't do it when we were in charge either, senator kerry.
there's been a failure of leadership in this country,n this body to attack the very problems. when we have 47 job-training programs and none of them are working well, because that's what we do know, because the very few times they've been looked at, they don't work, and we're spending $18 billion a year and we're not fixing them? the american peoe got to say, what is wrong with you all? so what -- what we have to do is we have to evaluate the effectiveness of every program in the federal government. we have to limit the overhead costs of federal programs. we've put ideas out there. this is $9 trillion worth of cuts. not washington cuts, american cuts, money you're not going to spend that's less than what we're spending today, not money you're not going to spend that you would have spent more the next year. this is real cuts. each one of these is in here
backed up by the facts, not biased. you could disagree with where you would make the cuts but you can't disagree with the facts in here, because all the facts come from the congressional research service, the gener accounting office, the office of management and budget, the president's budget in terms of his remmendations and why, and t c.b.o. we won't go there. my problem with the senate is we won't do our work. and we're as guilty. i don't -- this is not partisan to me. our country's future is at sta stake. and when we have two bills, one last nig and one today, that is -- are literally lying to the american people when they say "cuts," i think it's unconscionable. mr. kerry: would the senator further yield? mr. coburn: well, let me finish if i will, i will give you a chance and i will yield back to you in a moment. mr. kerry: very good. mr. coburn: the fact is, we won't tell the truth to the american people. and the first truth is, if we'll be honest with them, they will
understand what the necessities that will have to be brought forward in this country to be able to solve the problems. by denying what the problem is, we will never get the consensus in this country and the embrace of the american people to do wh everybody in this body knows is eventually going to have to be done. we will not have a medicare system that's like the medicare system we have today in five years. it is absolutely unsustainable. we will never be able to borrow the money to do it. we're going to get a debt downgrade no matter what we do. we will not be able to borrow the money. so rather than continue to be dishonest with the american people about the status of where we are, what we ought to do is embrace them and call for the very things that made this country great, the sacrifice of the citizens of this country to rebuild the potential for our future, to re-create a renewal in our country that embraces the things that made us great, a true free enterprise system with a limited government that will actually allow people to be rewarded for hard work, their
own blood, sweat and toil and get that back and have a government take a fair share of that. on theup side, it should be more. on the downside, it should be less. i agree. the question is, is will we do it? will we continue a charade to the american people, continuing to tell them we're going to cut $800 billion, $900 billion out of the discretionary budget when, in fact, we're going to increase it $832 billion? there's only $2 billion difference between senator reid's plan and speaker boehner's on discretionary spending and both of them are untruthful to the american people. both of them take the america people at a lap and say we can wink and nod at you and we can tell you something's that not true and we can walk out of here saying we spent less money. well, youe only going to spend less money than what we planned to spend, which was way too much in the first place, which was totally unsustainable as well. soet's just be honest with them. our deal is we don't have the courage to actually make the cuts that are listed in here. we don't have the courage to
eliminate the waste. we don't have the courage to eliminate the duplication. why? because every one of these programs has a political backing and we're politicians. and -- and unfortunately, too often we're that instead of statesmen. it's time for us, both sides, to lead this country, to lead the country in a vision of here's the real truth of our problem. now let's have a debate about what should be the number-one priority. how much should we spend on defense? should we continue to allow contracts to go way overrun? should we continue to allow requirement creep in contracts, not just in defense, in homeland security, in h.h.s.? we have the same problems we have in defense, we have in all the other big agencies. we buy $64 billion worth of i.t. every year in this country. and $37 billion of it is wasted,
totally blown. why? and what have we done about it? not one thing. just go look at the high-risk list for the g.a.o. on i.t. every year that happens. the census bureau spent $600 million on a device that never worked, there was no penalty for the company that did it. we paid it anyhow. it was a cost-plus contract. and the reason it never worked is because we had requirement creep all the way through. we don't have any grownups making the purchases for this country. nobody with experience. so we're doing the wrong things at the wrong time. what we need to be doings the right things at the right time for the right reason considering that we make sure we take care of those that need us to take care of them and then we demand participation of everybody else. we need to cap the total number of federal employees. not because we want to but
because we don't have any other choice. and we don't have to let anybody go. just through attrition, we can downsize the federal government. we waste $15 billion every fe years on managing properties in this country that we own that -- that -- they're vacant, and yet we're spending that money on them. but we can't get a real property bill through. how -- how -- how valuable to us is $15 billion? we've got to start paying attention to the pennies and the nickels and the dimes, and we won't do it. unnecessary government printings, including us. i've been trying to get the elimination of this for three years. there's millions and millions and millions of dollars we can save by not printing the copies of this every day that nobody looks to except i did see my good friend from illinois actually look at a vote last
night. but he could have got it on-line out of his blackberry. the point is we're tearing down trees to print paper we don't need. how much time do i have left? the presiding officer: the senator has 8 1/2 minutes remaining on the republican side. mr. corn: all right. [inaudible] mr. kerry: mr. president, i would just ask the senator again, what i'm trying to do is helps get out of this predicament we've got where we've got a couple of days before the united states defaults. everything the senator has said is worthy of inquiry, but isn't it te that if we could get -- i mean, part of the reid proposal and the boehner proposal proposes a joint committee that will be structured somewhat like a base closing commission that will require the senate and the house to vote in expeditious fashion on these kinds of proposals, whatever the joint committee proposes, and if the joint
committee doesn't succeed in proposing something, then hopefully either the gang of six or the simpson-bowles commission. so isn't it key now to resolving this crisis and not defaulting our ability to be able to come together on a sufficient trigger or some sufficient mechanism that guarantees we're actually going to deal with the things similar to what the senator is raising? mr. coburn: well, i would not disagree that those negotiations are going on as we speak. i'm not a party to them. i don't know if you are. i suspect the -- the -- the president pro tempore is, and we're not gng to get to decide that. that's going to come to us for a decisi. i don't -- look, i worked a long number of months with my colleagues from the other side of the aisle. i put my name on a bill that really dsn't fix it but it was something to get us moving, it's better than where we are today. i agree with you. but what i would tell you is that's not good enough.
we are not good enough yet to where we nd to be if we're actually going to solve the problem. let me just finish going through this. we need t end no-bid contracts in this country. give you a specific example. before he left here, senator lemieux got through the business bill prescreening of payments on medicare payments so that we look -- rather than we pay them and then go chase the fraud, we got through a bill that required the center for medicaid services to put in a program to look to see if they ought to pay the bill. and what did they do? they signed a cost-plus contract for $77 million with a firm that's never done that before and didn't take a particularred-price contract from firms that have already done it before. tell me how we let that happen, and yet it happened.
and when we had testimony in our committee, they said it was a fixed-price contract tonal write back and say it wasn't a fixed-price contract. we need some common sense in our government. i'll finish this up real quick. we need to disclose the text and cost of legislation prior to passage. we need to identify duplicative government programs. we've done that. that's in here. there's hundreds and thousands of them throughout the federal government. we need to eliminate the we need to mandate conessional oversight. that's where our leaders, i think, have failed on both sides. they haven't mandated the committee chairmen have to do the oversight that's required to solve this problem. we need to freeze the size of thisovernment. we can't afford the government we have today. the debate is about what will happen in the future, what will be the revue increases, what will be the spending increases. but nobody's talking about decreasing the size of the
federal government. we can't afford this government. we can't afford to continue to spend the money that we're spending. so i'll close with this, if we continue to be less than straightforward with the american people about what we're doing here, about the reid bill -- the reason i wanted to debate the boehner bill is i wanted to make this point on the boehnerill. when we call something a cut of $900 billion, just because the c.b.o. says we're going to spend $900 billion less than what we were planning to spend but still $832 billion more than that we are spending now, that's not a cut anywhere except i washington. and we ought to admit it. if that's the best we c do, the ameran people need to know that's the best we can do. t we can't play the games anymore. i have another colleague, i think, that would thraoeubg
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise seek recognition? mr. dreier: mr. speaker, iove to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 2693, to cut spending, maintain existing commitments and for other purposes, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 2693, a bill to cut spending, maintain existing commitments and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? >> parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman ll suspend. the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. the house will be in order.
the gentman has the right to be heard. the gentleman from massachusetts will state his inquiry. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, is it true that a bill considered under suspension of the rules denies the minority party the right to offer any amendments or even a motion to recommit? the speaker pro tempore: a motion to suspend is not liable to amendment on the floor. mr. mcgovern: further parliamentary inquiry, meerks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry. mr. mcgovern: is it true that it requires a 2/3 supermajority vote in order for a bill to vote? the speaker pro tempore: under rule 15, a motion to suspend it will have 2/3, a quorum being present. mr. mcgovern: further parliamentary inquiry, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquiry. >> the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman from massachusetts.
mr. mcgovern: is it also true, mr. speaker, that a bill considered under suspension of the rules does not pass if it receives a simple majority vote but not 2/3 of the vote? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. mr. mcgovern: and further parliamentary inquiry, m speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquiry. mr. mcgovern: does this mean that speaker boehner's bill to raise the debt limit and to destroy medicare would have failed if it would have been considered under suspension of the rules yesterday? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has not stated a quirequoir. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from califora, mr. dreier, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this measure and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the spear pro tempore: without obction, so ordered. mr. dreier: mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i think this is the first time that i've offered a reid proposal in the house of
representatives. and one might ask why it is that we are here doing this, and it's very apparent to me why it is that we're here doing this. and that is we want to ensure that next tuesday we see an increase in the debt ceiling so the social secity checks go out, we have -- we bring about spending reductions and maintain the credit rating of the united states of america and do everything that i believe that both republicans and democrats alike want to have take place. as you know, mr. speaker, we have passed from this house two measures within the last two weeks. the cut, cap and balance measure and just last night the boehner proposal which as we all know stem from a bipartisan meeting that he had exactly one week ago this afternoon in his meeting with senator reid right down the hall. and unfortunately mr. reid no longer supports the proposal that we passed last night, and
senator reid has said on several occasions that his plan is the only plan that can pass both houses of congress. now, five minutes ago senator mcconnell once again asked senator reid to bring up this plan that senator reid said was the only one that could pass both houses of congress and senator reid said no. thursday night i introduced this measure of senator reid's and was asked in the rules committee yesterday by mr. mcgovern whether or not we would bring it up and i said we didn't plan to. but the fact is senator mcconnell, having made the request now at least twice in the other body to have it brought up, asked us to raise this measure here and that's exactly what we are doing. now, if we look at where it is
that we're headed, we all want to have a bipartisan compromise that will ensure that on tuesday we see that increase in the debt ceiling take place and do these other things. that's what the speaker of the house and the democratic leader of the united states senate, along with leader mcconnell, lead pelosi discussed a week ago today. and as speaker boehner said from the well last night, this was an agreement which was supported by senator reid. but things have changed, things have changed, we know that. but there is one thing that has not changed. and that is we have to act as quickly as possible. we need to come up with a compromise and you know what? since senator reid happens to believe that his measure is the only one that can pass both houses of congress, we are going to let him know when we defeat
it here in the house of representatives that it is not the plan th can gain broad support in the house and the senate. and so for that reason, mr. speaker, we are bringing this up , we, i believe, should have an opportunity for every member of this house to go on record on this issue and i'm going to urge my colleagues to vote no on this proposal so that we can come together with an important bipartisan compromise to achieve the goal that we all say that we share and with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, this process has become a joke. it is a disgrace. it's an insult to the american people. i would say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, now is the time to act like grownups. this is the time to put our country before your political
party. this is the time to put our country before the tea party. this is the time to do what's right. today you are bringing up the latest version of the reid plan. under not only a closed rule but under the most restrictive process we have in the house. usually reserved for noncontroversial bills. this is a $2.5 trillion bill being brought up under the same process that you bring up bills naming post offices. 20 minutes of debate, no amendments allowed, we're not even allowed to offer a motion to recommit to where you need a 2/3 supermajority. under this process your own bill would have failed. that's right. if your bill were brought up under this procedure, your bill would have lost last night. mr. speaker, the only bill we hould consider on the house floor is one that has been agreed to by the house and senate leaders and the president of the united states. so why are we doing this today? let's be honest, you're doing it to score some cheap political points. i would like to remind the speaker of the house that he's
the speaker of not just the republican party but that he's the speaker of the whole house. now is a time to bring us together, noary us apart -- not tear us apart. maybe the reid bill is the one that can unite us because it achieves tremendous savings without decimating medicare, medicaid and social security. but, mr. speaker, to bring it up under this process is cynical and it demeans the house of representatives. i would say to the republican leadership, enough political stunts. our country is facing a terrible onomic crisis. a crisis that you created and one that you can avoid. but we've run out of time. now is the time for leadership, not bad political theater. now is the time to bto behave like legislators. please rise to the occasion. the reid bill is not the bill i would have written. it's not the truly balanced approach that i would have hoped for. there are no revenues in this bill. but i think it's the best approach that is on the table right now. and i'm willing to compromise. so i will vote yes on this bill.
i'm willing to put my country first. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. members are advised to address their comments to the chair. not to other members. the gentleman from california, mr. dreier. mr. dreier: at this time i'm happy to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished former chairman of the committee on appropriations, my friend from califnia, mr. lewis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. lewis, is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. lewis: mr. speaker, if it were not for the remarks of my colleague from california as well as his colleague from the rules committee, i wouldn't be making these remarks. i'll begin with a quote. the factshat we are here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.
increasing america's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. leadership means that the buck stops here. instead washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership, americans deserve better, unquote. senator barack obama, march of 2006. by 2009 senator obama had become president obama. in two years since he became president, federal spending has ineased by over 5ds00 billion a year -- $500 billion a year. in the past two years he has added nearly $4 trillion to our national debt. now president obama is in favor
of increasing the national debt limit. when, oh, when will the real barack obama stand up? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the distinguished gentleman from maryland, the democratic whip, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, my colleagues, our neighbors, our friends sent us here to be responsible and to come to the aiof our country at a time of crisis. our country is at such a time now. our people confront uncertainty
and fear and they're looking to us, looking to us for the courage to compromise and act to prevent default and to prevent gridlock and irresponsibility. yesterday we learned that investors in american stocks lost more than $400 billion when just a few days ago speaker boehner said he could not compromise with president obama. now we're standing -- notwithstanding the remarks of my friend from california, the chairman of the rules committee, who talks about a bipartisan compromise, i tell my friend, you have not moved a single centimeter towards compromise with our side of the aisle. not a single centimeter.
and what do we see in the united states senate, my friends? we see a majority leader of the united states sena who has the president with him, so, yes, you control 1/3 and you control over 40%, so you can stop things from happening in the senate, but the people aren't looking to us for what we can stop. they're looking to us for what we can do. for what we can do to make our country healed at this point in time. so what has senator reid done with this bill that you introduced, guaranteed to fail? this is the second time you've put a bill on the floor to extend the debt limit guaranteed to fail. it is a pattern, frankly, i is a -- i say to you, my friends, and it's a pattern that the american public ought not to count on. what senator reid has done is he's taken the view of the
speaker boehner and leader cantor and said, we need a long-term solution. and then he has compromised notwithstanding the fact that all of us on this side believe that the wealthiest among us should help take us out of this crisis and not rely on the most vulnerable among us. and so there is no revenue in senator reid's bill, notwithstanding the overwhelming numbers of us on this side of the aisle believe that's good policy. and i know that some of you on your side of the aisle believe that as well. senator reid has set up a process so that we can continue to look at what we know we need to look at, bringing our deficit and debt down for which we are all responsible, my friends. i thank the gentlen. so we confront this moment of responsibility. i believe my side of the aisle will overwhelmingly say yes, not
because they like this bill but because they believe it is a compromise that can work. because it takes so much of the dends that you have made on your side of the aisle, butf you came to congress expecting perfection, if you came to congress expecting only that you do it your way and no other way, you will be disappointed. as all of us are disappointed because it cannot happen that way. our founding fathers brought us from many places with many perspectives to try to heal our country and provide for the general welfare. let us avoid default. let us set ourselves on a path compromise. my friends on the republican side of the aisle, we're going to vote for the most part for this bill. we do not believe it's perfect. but we believe it's possible. america expects us to do that.
the summer soldiers and sunshine patriots will retreat at this time of crisis. do not do that. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. dreier: i yield my friend an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the ntleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. and the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i will say that i was prepared to engage in a colloquy with my good friend from maryland and explain to him thatf senator reid believes that this is a great compromise why will he not respond to senator mcconnell's repeated requests to bring it up in the united states senate? and with that, mr. speaker, with that, mr. speaker, i'm happy to yield one minute to our presidential candidate, our good friend from still water,
minnesota, mrs. bachmann. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized. the house will be in order. mrs. bachmann: thank you, mr. speaker. throughout this debate over guaranteeing insane never-before-seen in the history of this country levels of spending, president obama has coolly stood on the sidelines, his arms crossed, very simply castigating republicans for not giving him a $2.4 trillion blank check. meanwhile the only plan that the president has put forward is his february budget which in itself contained yet one more $1.5 trillion deficit. the president has no plan. only the republicans have offered plans. now is the time for the president to show leadership and the only leadership that he's showing is one that's saying,ities ,ities ,ities -- saying, tisk, tisk, tisk.
we call on the president of the united states to finally engage in the process. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota, mrs. bachmann, yields back. the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let me just remind the gentlelady that no one on the democratic side ever walked out of a meeting. at this point i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, the ranking member of the ways and means committee, mr. levin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recoized for one minute. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. levin: i've been here almost 29 years. this is a disgraceful moment. this country wants compromise. what you're doing with this bill is to underme the chances of compromise. th's what you're doing. you're trying to throw a monkey wrench in the reid bill before it can even leave the station. that's what you're doing. you're trying to make sure that the senate cannot work its will.
why isn't this bill being brought up? because senator reid wants to sit down with senate republicans and work out a compromise and you're bringing up this bill to make sure that this will never happen, this is a disgceful moment, mr. dreier, it is a disgraceful moment. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. levin: no. mr. dreier: madam speaker, may i yield time to my friend? may i yield time to my friend fr michigan? am i allowed to yield time to my friend? mr. levin: mr. dreier, you have always spoken and the -- mr. dreier: i am the author of this measure. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has not been recognized. mr. levin: i want you to yield to me. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman 15 seconds. mr. levin: mr. dreier, it's clear what you're doing here. mr. reid wants to sit down and work with mr. mcconnell.
what you're trying to do is make sure that a signal is sent to theenate, don't bother, we're going to -- mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. levin: yes. mr. dreier: i say the action we are about to do here today is see the process that senator mcconnell and senator reid work together. why? mr. levin: i take back my time. mr. dreier, that is pernicious nonsense. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded to address their comments to the chair, not otherwise. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i didn't hear you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: i said members are rended to address their comments to the chair and not to others. mr. dreier: i will not only address you, madam chair, i won't point my finger at you as i address you. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. mr. dreier: let me say, madam speaker, that senator mcconll has just minutes ago asked
senator reid to bring the reid proposal to the floor of the united states senate and a decision has been made by senator reid not to bring the measure up. on at least three occasions senator mcconnell has asked since senator reid has said that his proposal is the only one that can pass both houses of congress, senator mcconnell has asked us to show what we all know and had a is there is not going to be a majority of support in the -- all know and there is not going to be a majority of support. we look forward to the discussions that will take place between speaker boehner, senator reid, leader mcconnell, leader pelosi. and with that, madam speaker, i'd like to yield 30 seconds to a hardworking new member of congress from indiana, mr. young. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. young: thank you, madam speaker. we need to c spending now. we need to control spending in the future. but the american people understand that our foremost
constitutional duty here in congre is to make sure that america is safe. former secretary gates said that further cuts to our military will mean there are certain things our military won't be able to do and places they won't be able to go. this proposal, the reid-obama plan, proposes to cut spending by $859 billion or 10 years compared to the president's fiscal year 2011 budget. yet, the president and senator reid has told us which places we won't be going and which missions we won'ting doing. it's irresponsible. i can't support this proposal. the spear pro mpore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, a member of the committee of the ways and means, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. doggett: this republican ploy is too clever by hat. at the very same time republican senators are filibustering against bringing up this proposal in the senate. the house republicans are
insisting on bringing it up here so they can vote it down. while it is imperfect and imbalanced, this reid proposal protects educational opportunities for college students, it protects retirement security through medicare and social security, and it provides more important resources for public services than the reactionary house republican budget. with house republicans still at fault for refusing to seek any type of middle ground, the reid bill is the least worse alternative to avoid default. as desperate as they were last night, to cobble together a handful of votes to pass a partisan boehner bill, they are even more desperate to defeat this reasonable middle ground because they insist it must have 2/3 votes in this body. let us join democrats in unity to approve this proposal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 10 seconds to
remind my friend from texas that the measure we voted on last night stemmed from the bipartisan agreement that was put together one week ago this afternoon right down the hall. and with that i'm happy to yield one minute to my good friend frojefferson, louisiana, mr. scalise. the spear pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for one minute. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman for yielding. if you look at the reid bill it doesn't even start to address the problem. with all of the budget gimmicks and shell games, people would recognize if you have an honest conversation it doesn't even start to tackle the spending problem. now, hardworking american families back home know the problem in america is not we got corporate jet owners and millionaires andillionais, the problem is that washington spends too much money. you don't solve that problem by sending more money up to washington to spend even more. and so when the president talks about a balanced approach, what he really means is more job-killing tax hikes. families back home know what we really need is a balanced budget amendment to put accountability back in place in washington, to control this rampant out-of-control spending
in washington and to finally attack the real problem and that's washington spending. i oppose the bill, and i yield back the balance of my te. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: madam speaker, this agreement offers the calm, reasonable compromise the country wants. most americans don't want to let the debt ceiling expire. this bill solves that problem. most americans say, you know what, you probably could cut about 5% in most government programs. not everybody believes that, but that's what this bill does. most americans say there ought to be some other way to look at difficult entitlement programs and other issues that the bill sets up a process to do that. what the bill does is recognize the difference between the two parties and puts that difference aside. the majority party wants to make radical changes in medicare and social security. we do not. we believe that the wealthiest
americans should pay their fair share to solve this problem. the majority party does not. the bill leaves that disagrment aside, focuses on the areas of agreement. you know, american troops on patrol are not asking under what conditions they should do their duty this afternoon. they're understanding their duty and they're doing it, and so should we. pass this bill. the spker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield 130ekds to my good friend from colorado, a hardworking new member of the class of 87 people that came in here to change this place, mr. tipton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. tipton: thank you. when we hear our colleague from texas this is the least worst alternative and that's our best choice? i think the american people demand and deserve better.
it's time we put people before politics and partisanship aside so that we can have progress for the american people. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts rise? mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield to the gentleman from texas, ms. jackson lee, for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempe: for what time? mr. mcgovern: i yield for unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for unanimous consent. ms. jackson lee: i stand here united for america voting yes on this bill to save medicare, medicaid and social security. as an american i ask unanimous consent to put my statement into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, a member of the financial services committee, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: thank you very much. thank you very much, mr. chairman. ladies and gentlemen of the house of representatives, this is not a nation of tea party people. it is not a nation of democrats
or republicans. it is a nation of all of us, and what the reid plan presents, it represents the tea party, the republicans and the democrats and the president of the united states. this is what the american peoplexpect us to do. that is what has made this country great. at critical times we've come together a we have compromised. we're protecting medare. we're protecting social security. we're protecting medicaid as the people of this country want. and yet, as the republicans and tea party wants, there are no tax increases in this. as the president of the united states has asked us, there will be a second act in the year 2013. ladies and gentlemen of this house, the time is present. it is time for us to do the american thing. stand up for the american people and let us compromise in the best interest of all of us so this nation will not go into default. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 second. the spker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: thhouse is not in order, madam speaker. well, it is now. madam speaker, i think it's very important to note tt yesterday and today we are continuing to hear that under the boehne proposal that cuts in medicare and social security would take place when in fact both the boehner and reid proposals have virtually identical, identical plans to put into place -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: joint select committee that would in fact report back to this institution. thank you very much for helping to obtain order, friends. and madam speaker, i'm happy to yield one minute to my very good friend from houston, a member of the appropriations committee, mr. culberson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. culberson: thank you. madam speaker, it's important for everyone to know the reason the house is considering this bill today is to put up another guardrail, to show what the
house cannot do. it's important in any compromise to understand what can and cannot be done. the house will not pass this new constitutional conservative majority of the house will not pass the reid bill because of its devastating cut to our u.s. military. the house is going to find a way to compromise with the senate, but it is not going to include massive cuts in the military. it's -- as we've established, not going to include tax increases. it looks like it's going to include some sort of select committee that will make recommendations to the congress. we're going to find a way to make sure that arica does not hit the brick wall of running out of the ability to borrow. but this is one of the most important debates, one of the most important votes wwill have in our brief time here in congress is to make sure we're protecting our kids and grandchildren from a crushing unaffordable level of debt. so we're working hard to find what the limits are, -- limits are of what the house and senate will do. we're not going to cut the
military as the reid bill would. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, yield myself 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempe: the gentleman is recognized for 15 second. combovegove make no mistake about it. from day one this majority has put the military on the chopping block. and the reid would disamate medicare as we know it and -- the boehner bill would disamate medicare and the military as we know. i yield to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. wasserman schultz, for two minutes. the spker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam speaker. i would point out that to my good friend from texas, madam speaker, as a constitutional conservative he should recoize that the constitution itself was a series of compromises. and our nation and our economy is being pushed closer and closetory default. hardliners on the right, extremists by any other name, have refused to compromise. we are putting in jeopardyhe payment of social security obligations, paying the members of our military, the chairman
of the joint chiefs of sff yesterday couldn't even answer in the affirmative that he was confident that those payments could be made if we default. we're putting in jeopardy the full faith and credit of our nation. yesterday, seniors in my district called my office in tears wondering whether we would default and what those consequences would mean for them. these are real people who live on social security to survive. we have many strongly held views on both sides of the aisle. i don't like everything the reid proposal before us. but compromise is critical. i recognize that i can't have everything 100% my way. democrats have been at the compromise table for months. with an empty chair on the other side of the aisle. it is time on the other side of the table, it's time for republicans to warm that seat across from us. mr. dreier claims that republicans have brought the reid proposal to the floor to show that it doesn't represent a bill that can pass the house. yet, the process is a sham. the bill has been brought up under a rule that requires a 2/3 vote of this house for
passage which they know cannot happen. what are republicans afraid of? th're afraid if their propose might just show how much support there is for this proposal. where are the cooler heads in the republican caucus? where are they? they appear to not exist. your caucus seems to be held hostage by extremists and have driven the moderates from the room and from the discussion. allowing extremists to take over is doing harm to our country. president obama, house and senate democrats have said that we are willing to support cuts. even to programs we would not -- can i have another 15 seconds, please? mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentlelady 15 seconds. ms. wasserman schultz: we said we would support cuts even to programs we would normally fight to preserve. republicans have doubled down in a groundhog day move that has pushed dead on arrival proposals by bringing us closer to the brink of chaos. at the end of the day the
stewardship of our economy is in jeopardy. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- the gentleman from california is recognized. . mr. dreier: i'm happy to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from from washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from washington is recognized for one minute. miss harrah beutler: the reason we came here, this caucus is here, the freshmen are here because the american people said enough. they said you are spending too much of our money. that's what this conversation is about today. the president stood on the -- across the row tuppeda a couple years ago and said it's a failure of leadership to raise the debt ceiling. guess what? i came here never expecting to raise the debt ceiling. but i'm now compromised. i have twice voted to raise the debt ceiling to cover spending
from failed stimulus, from a health care bill that ends medicare as we know it. i have voted -- twice. twice for solutions. and you know what? that's compromise for me. i came -- when i ran for this, this seat, i told the people that i serve, you know what? i'm not extreme, i am mad i'm mad that washington, d.c., thinks you are their piggy bank. that's what this debate is about. we end it today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself 10 seconds, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 10 seconds. mr. mcgovern: to remind the gentlelady that she has voted time and time and time again to decimate medicare, medicaid, and social security. we are not going to stand by and let them do that. at this point i'd likeo yield two minutes to the gentleman from myland, the ranking member of the budget committee. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be inrder. the gentleman will suspend.
the house will be in order. mr. mcgovern: at this point, madam speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the distinguished ranking member of the budget committee, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam speaker. i think the american people just heard a new definition of compromise. paying your bills is a compromise. the american family can't wake up one morning and say, boy, it's a compromise and pay for what i already incurred. it's a compromise to pay my mortgage. that's a new one for the american people. and it's part of a reckless pattern that we have seen emerging here. furs our republican colleagues walked out of the biden talks. then twice they walked out of the talks of the president of the united states. then when the republican leader in the senate put forward a proposal, they ridiculed it. thursday night in this very house they said no to the proposal by the republican speaker of this house until he amended it. the same speaker who said we
need to have an adult moment. here's theoncluding paragraph of today's "wall street journal." republicans are not looking like adults to whom we can entrust the government. the american people are looking for that adult moment. if you're not willing to compromise on critical things for the country, you are not fit to govern. and that is why senator reid put forward a compromise proposal. he doesn't like his own proposal. he would be the first to tell you that. you know what it did? it met the criteria our republican colleagues put forward. $2.4 trillion in cuts. even if you take out the war savings, more guaranteed cuts according to c.b.o. than the boehner proposal the other night. it also incorporates mcconnell's proposal. here's what it doesn't do. it doesn't end t medicare arantee. it doesn't cut social security. and it doesn't protect tax breaks for special interests corporations. now, look, what we are seeing
here is people who are holding the american economy hostage. you have to stop playing kamikaze pilot with the future of the american people. in order to extract 100% of demands for budgets your way. compromise is necessary. and that is what senator reid put forward. a compromise proposal. let's show we can govern together. the spker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield myself five seconds to again say to my colleagues the measure we voted on last night stemmed from a bipartisan compromise put together in this very capital one week ago today. with that, madam speaker i'm happy to yield 30 seconds--actually one minute to my good friend from ohio, mr. jordan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. jordan: i thank the gentleman for yielding. let's cut tohe numbers and what this bill does. we got a $14 trillion debt. this is going to raise the debt
ceiling $2.4 trillion. achieving savings of $18 billion in the first. think of it the american people see things. you got a ki who mad out the credit card at $14,000. the kid goes to the bank and the bank says ok here's what we are going to do. we are going to give you $2,400 on the credit card, but you have to promise us over the next year you're going to spend $18 less than you planned on spending. that's what this bill does. this bill doesn't even come close to starting to solve the problem. that's why we are against it. that's why it should be defeated. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the house will be in order. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgoern: i yield myself fiveeconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: my colleague from california keeps on saying that the boehner bill was bipartisan. i remind him not one single democrat voted for that bill because democrats do not want to decimate social security. mr. dreier: would the gentleman
yield? mr. mcgovern: at this time i'd like to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fattah. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. fattah: i assume that something that the amerin people are gullible, but this is not a coincidence or happenchance. we got a republican majority that took us from trillions in surplus to triions in deficit. added a $7 trillion prescription drug plan. unfunded wars. and then refused any additional revenue. and choking off our country's ability to pay its debt. now they want to walk us towards default. there is a special place in the shadows of the history books for a group of people who in order to gain power were willing to sacrifice americans' leadership in this war. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speake i'd like to yield any of my colleagues on the other side of the aie who will tell me where in the boehner bill it says that
we want to cut medicare, social security, or any of the her items that they continue to attack? may i i'm happy to yield to anyone who can point to me whe in the boehner bill it says that. i'm happy to yield to anyone. obviously -- i'm happy to yield to my friend. mr. mcgovern: balanced budget amendment you have, the ryan budget. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. mr. dreier: madam speaker, with that i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to my good friend from colorado. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for 30 seconds. >> thankou, madam speaker. madam speaker, the president of the united states, barack obama, has said to the congress that we need to put america first and get this done. mr. coffman: i agree with that. i agree that we need to put america first and take politics -- put politics aside. last weekend a bipartisan
proposal emerged. which speaker boehner and majoty leader reid, senator reid coming to an agreement. but the president of the united states got hold of senator reid and said, absolutely not. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: an additional 15 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. coffman: thank you, madam speaker. the reason why he pulled the agreement was because it didn't have enough money to get him through the election of 2012, november of 2012. the president's campaign considerations is not putting america first. we need to put america first -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. coffman: vote down -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. van hollen: the chairman of the rules committee wanted to yiel-- the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman is not is recognized. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. dreier: we have a lot of members who would like to be heard. i extended time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: may i inquire of the time remaining on both sides? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has four minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 6 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. mcgovern: we'll reserve our time. maybe the gentleman from california might want to yield to mr. van hollen. we reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i did ask a few minutes ago and expended time by asking anyone to yield. i mean -- we have a lot of members here who want to be heard from. mr. mcgovern has time if he would like to yield. i yield 15 seconds to my friend and maybe mr. mcgovern will yield him 15 seconds and then we can hear what mr. van hollen has to hear. i yield the gentleman 15 seconds, madam speaker.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. van hollenif you look at the boehner proposal it says we got to cut $1.8 trillion. the speaker of the house has already said that you can't have any revenue as part of that. you can't close one corporate loophole. in fact he said that the majority would override any proposal. so the only other way to get it math mathically is to start slashing medicare. and to start going after social security. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. dreier: madam speaker, my point has been made very eloquently by the gentleman. i very much appreciate it. the speaker pro tempore: who seeks recognition? mr. dreier: i thank my friend for his contribution. madam speaker, at this point i'm happy to yield one minute to my good friend from drexel hill, pennsylvania, mr. meehan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute.
mr. meehan: thank you, mr. chairman. as we used to say in the courtroom, the facts are, there are no facts. the truth of the matter is the only people who are cutting $500 billion from medicare are the democrats in their proposal. but that's not -- the gentleman will not yield. i'll me my point and be happy to be off. the issue here is really one of compromise. i come here as a freshman. somebody that's looking at this for the first time. and we came in and worked on a bill, the behner proposal. the frustration from me was knowing going in th evening that i had already been made aware that this leadership, the leadership of the party on the other side, had ripped their members so not a single member was ready on the other side to sit and talk to anyone on this aisle. the whip was there.
you will not vote. you will not talk. we were not able. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. those in the back of the chamber will take their conversations off the floor. e gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: is recognized for 10 second. mr. van hollen: just to be very clear. what we did was eliminated the overpayments to some ofhe medicare advantage pns and, and -- madam speaker -- madam speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the house is not in order. the gentleman will suspend.
the gentleman is recognized. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam speaker. we used much of those savings to close the prescription drug doughnut hole. in your budget you took the hole $500 billion, but you reopened the drug doughnut hole at the same time you are eliminating the medicare guarantee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. drei: madam speaker, let me yield myself five seconds to say i thank the gentleman for once again pointing to the fact there is nothing in the boehner proposal that there's anything that cuts social security or medicare. madam speaker, with that i'm happy to yield 15 seconds to a new member from zealand michigan, mr. high tsenga -- high sanga. the speaker pro tempore: the gentman is recognized for 15 second. mr. huizenga: we heard from a colleague from florida on the other side of the aisle talking about the constitution and intend of it. ladies and gentlemen, this is about controlling our spending and accountability with the american people. and it might not be in this
bill. it might not be in the other bills. eventually we have to realize we need to institutional brakes on our spending because we cannot control our spending in this institution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: if this is about protecting social security, medicare, and medicaid, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from south carolina, mr. clyburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. clyburn: thank you very much, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. the clock is ticking. the american people are anxiously waiting for responsible leadership. and the republicans here in congress are continuing to play political games. last night the united states senate rightly defeated the boehner bill on a bipartisan vote. that partisan bill was the product of the republicans' my way or the highway approach that held all amicans hostage to
ransom payment for medicare, medicaid, and social security beneficiaries. . now, we must find a commonsense compromise. that's why i will vote for the reid amendment today -- reid bill today. the reid bill says it will not let us default from our fiduciary obligations. throughout deliberations on the self-inflicted debt crisis, my bottom line has been to protect social security, medicare and medicaid. this plan contains real spendinguts and deficit reduction to begin putting our nation's fiscal house in order. it meets the speaker's requirement that spending be cut by the amount at least as
large as the debt ceiling increase. and it does so while protecting social security, medicare and medicaid beneficiaries. it also safeguards programs that provide low-income young people the opportunity to go to college and to work to achieve the american dream. we must take responsible action now to avert this crisis and move to significant measures to create jobs and generate economic growth. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. clyburn: thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from tupelo, mississippi, mr. nunnelee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from mississippi is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. nunnelee: thank you, madam speaker. we heard from the people on the other side, we want mpromise. e american people expect solutions.
and this harry reid plan offers no real solutions to the out-of-control spending problem. this harry rd plan offers no solutions to the broken washington mess that got us here, so i'll vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, may i inquire about the time on both sides, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has 1 3/4 minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 4 1/2 minutes. mr. mcgovern: we'll reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield to my friend from new jersey, mr. garrett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. one minute.
mr. garrett: and as i come to the floor, as the previous speaker said, this side of the aisle is committed to reaching a solution and not just a deal to this problem. we are committed to reaching out across the aisle and across the other side of this house to reach a compromise. we have already compromised on the level of cuts going even further. we have already compromised on the level of the caps, raising the caps to make it even easier in that regard as well. we have also already compromised from where we started with regard to a balancedudget amendment, holding true to the idea that we should, as all americans agree, eventually pass a change in the constitution and require a balanced budget amendment to this bill. but at the end of the day, although wwill compromise on cuts and we will comomise on caps and we will compromise moving forward on a balanced budget amendment, let it be clear as god as my witness we will not compromise on our
principles, our principles of defending the constitution and defending america and making sure our prosperity does not have this excessive debt on it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. engel: well, thank you. here we are on the brink of economic disaster and we're wasting time with symbolic political theater at its worth. we want compromise and solutions and to protect medicare on the democratic side. why don't you try working with democrats? the american people want us to meet in the middle. they don't want this nonsense. the debate focuses only on spending cuts without closing tax loopholes and that still isn't enough for some. no wonder "the wall street journal" said no wonder they don't look like adults. the democrats want a compromise in the middle and the president needs to pull the 14th amendment -- the spker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.
mr. engel: the republicans have shown they don't want compromise at all. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: ank you very much, madam speaker. at this time i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to e gentleman from newberg, indiana, mr. bucshon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for 30 second. mr. bucshon: madam speaker, here we are on the verge of a financial meltdown and my friends on the other side of the aisle are worried about politics. they're here tod worried about protecting the president from having to do his job, lead the republicans in the house are leading. we passed two bills that would end this crisis, and the senate hasn't -- they haven't put them down. they haven't voted on them. they've tabled them. we're here to lead. we need leadership. and we're providing it. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, our side is prepared to close so i will ask -- we'll reserve our time.
mr. dreier: madam speaker, we have several more speakers on our side. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: at this time i'm happy to yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from ashton, wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. duffy: my friends acrs the aisle votedo rob $500 billion out of medicare for obamacare. they instituted a board that will ration care for our seniors. we brought a proposal for our house that will root out all loopholes in nooks and crannies for businesses who hide their money and they vot no. >> will the gentleman yield? mr. duffy: the american people -- will the gentleman yield? -- >> will the gentleman yield? mr. duffy: the harry reid bill is full of -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. duffy: budget gimmicks
which doesn't get the job done. the speaker pro tempore: who claims time? the house will be in order. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you very much, madam speaker. at this time i'm happy to yield 30 second to the gentleman from mississippi mr. pa. the spear pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. palazzo: the american people expect us to lead during times of crisis. house republicans have led. house republicans have provided plans and solutions to america's debt crisis. house republicans have used their voice as representatives of tir district to end the deficit crisis and to balance a budget. we've done our job. it's time a the senate does
theirs. leader reid and president obama is what stands in the way of helping this debt crisis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. palazzo: vote no on the reid plan. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman reserve? mr. mcgovern: i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record an article that appeared in "the wall street journal" today entitled "the debt limit hobbits." the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, is the gentleman prepared to close? i'm sorry. mr. mcgovern: yes. our leader is prepared to close for us. the speaker pro tempore: then i'll close on our side. i reserve the balance of my time -- mr. dreier: then i'll close on our side. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time.
the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i yield myself 15 seconds before i yield the remaining minute to -- the speaker pro tempor the entleman is recognized for 15 seconds. mr. mcgovern: i implore rational republicans to passing the reid bill. i appeal to your sense of responsibility, to your sense of duty to your country, have the courage of your convictions to do what's right. don't be paralyzed by the threats of the tea party or other extreme groups. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: medicare, medicaid and social security, and i yield the balance of our time, one minute, to the gentwoman from california, the democratic leadeand the dender of medicare, medicaid and social security, nancy pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for the time remaining. pelosi -- ms. pelosi: thank you very much, madam speaker. i recognize the great leadership of mr. van hollen as our ranking member on the
budget committee and he and mr. clyburn representing the values of the american people at the negotiating ble for this. i rise in support of the reid legislation. i urge my colleagues to support it because it protects social security, medicaid and medicare , because it is fair. but i want to use my time in the following way -- i listened very carefully and very attentively to our speaker yesterday when he spoke and he used the term, "the bill is not perfect but we did our level best." our level best. one might infer from that that this process is on the level. how can it be on the level if we're bringing a $2.5 trillion bill to the floor under suspension the same way we might bring the naming of a post office? $2.5 trillion, 20 minutes on
each side. members have said on both sides of the aisle this is a very important debate. well, if it is why is it brought unr suspension which requires a 2/3 vote guaranteeing that it will not prevail, not on the level? the word level, of course, enters into, is this on a level playing field? is it level for senior citizens while it gives big tax beaks for oil? is it level so we can give tax breaks to corporations sending jobs overseas? is it on the level for us to make children -- young people and their milies pay more for their college education so we can give tax breaks to the high end? is it on the level to bring a boehner bill to the floor that makes all those cuts, undermines social security, eliminates medicare and it
doesn't charge one red cent to people who have benefited so much from the greatness of our country? is it our best? is it our best to drag this out for all this time to keep in sess spence as to whether we would -- suspense as to whether we would honor our constitutional responsibility to pay our debts? the constitution says the national debt has to be recognized. it has to be recognized. and recognize we did. present after president, 3 times in -- 32 times in recent memory, including when president bush was president, at that time, even though many of us did not agree with the war in iraq, did not agree the tax cuts for the wealthiest people in our country to the tunes of hundreds of billions of dollars, not agree to the giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry, we didn't agree with that policy.
that's how we got into debt. turning around from the surplus direction we were going in with president clinton whose last four budgets were in balance or in surplus. we didn't agree hopresident bush took us into debt, but we never, never stood in the way of honoring the full faith and credit of the united states. why, then, why, then -- why, then would we this one time with this presidentecide that we would put up barriers so extreme, changing the constitution in order to lift the debt limit? it's a mathematical requirement. of course we must all reduce the deficit. but is it our best to say we're going to use the debate to
reduce the deficit, to destroy the public's faith? look at the appropriations bills that are brought before us. destying the public's faith of clean air, clean water, food safety, the education of our children, the health and financial security of our seniors through medicare and medicaid, that's what they are doing. this is -- we have come to those conclusions, we have to do it, we know how to do it. but if they want to take it to the next step of destroying the public sector, we cannot go to that place when it affects the air our children breathe, the water they drink, the food they eat, the education they receive, the safety of the neighborhoods in which they live. the speaker also said that the bill was not perfect. . no bills perfect. i disagree in one respect.
i think this bill is perfect in its absurdity. his bill was perfectly absurd. perfectly absurd. perfectly absurd again to say to a president after 32 times lifting the debt ceiling we are going to change the game for you, mr. president. it's perfectly absurd for them to say that the bill they brought to the floor -- the boehner bill they brought to the floor was an agreement of the four leaders of the house an senate, democrat and republican. either you don't know what you're talking about or or -- i will not yield to you. very, very important that w all take a deep breath. we have important work to do. important decision to make. senator reid has given us a direction to go. no cuts in benefits for medicare
and medicaid and social security beneficiaries. i wish that we had revenues in there so that those who had been fitted from the greatness the last 50 years of bipartisan progress for the american people would be able to make their contribution, but not one read -- red cent of revenue while we are saying kids should pay more for their student loans. so it's time to end this theater of the absurd. it's time for us to get real. it's time for us to get real and listen to the wisdom of the american people. they have said to us that they suppt an overwhelming -- in overwhelming numbers a bipartisan balanced approach. in overwhelming numbers that we should all pay our fair share. and they all agree that we should get this over with so we can get back to work putting the
american people back to work by creating jobs. the speaker chose when he didn't have the votes instead of to reach out in a bipartisan way to see how we could work together, he chose to goo the dark side. let's bring -- let me repeat. and i repeat, he chose to go to the dark side. by putting forth a bill that he himself told his members would sink it in the senate and i add lead to default. lead to default. we cannot default. we are the greatest country that ever existed in the history of the world.
we are the united stes of america. so let's go from the dark side to the bright side of the american people. vote yes on the reid bill. thank you. the eaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members will take their seats. members in the back of the chamber will remove their conversations.
the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: i yiel myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for the balance of the time. mr. dreier: i believe in civil discourse and i want to say that on several occasions in the past 45 minutes members of my staff have urged me to have the words takn down that have been offered by members on the other side of the aisle. and i chose not to, i chose not to, madam speaker, -- the speaker pro tempore: the house is not in order. the house is not in order.
the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: madam speaker, in the name of civility i chose not to because we have a very serious issue that needs to be addressed. and it's before us and we need to make sure that in the next several hurs we effectively address it. now, since 1962, since 1962 on 75 different occasions we have seen the united states congress increase the debt ceiling. now, we keep hearing about the urgency that exists today. i'll tell you what's urgent. if we don't change the course that we have been on the last four years with an 82% increase in nondefense discretionary spending, we are not going to have resources for any of the things tt my colleagues have talked about. what we need to do and the message that has been sent is that for the first time ever we are going to change business as
usual. now, i'm going to say something i probably shouldn't at the very end here. there are some good things in senator reid's proposal. there are some good things in senator reid's proposal. i believe that the idea of establishing a joint select committee of our colleagues who will come together and make recommendations and force an up or down vote in both houses of congress is a positive thing. but i will say this. i don't believe, i don't believe that continuing down the road towards increasing debt ceiling without -- with the kinds of checks that are necessary is the right thing for us to do. last night's agreement that we voted on here was in fact, it stemmed from the bipartisan talks that took place right down this hall. and i will say to my colleagues, madam speaker, vote no on the
>> following the house vote, they told reporters that president obama need to indicate what kind of debt ceiling deal he will sign. they spoke for about five minutes. the think today's vote on house floor indicates there is bipartisan opposition to senator reid's proposal. the house yesterday sent our second bill to and this crisis to the senate. it is a reasonable, responsible approach -- and this crisis and get our economy moving again and get -- and get americans back to work. and the only thing standing in the way of the house proposal over in the senate is the president and senator reid. it is time for them to tell us what they are for. time to tell us how they are going to get us out of the cul-
de-sac that they have driven our country into. we are hoping we will hear from them soon about their plan for how we end this crisis. >> i do not want to linger too long on the spectacle going on over in the senate, but it is worth noting that you have the majority in the fact refusing to accept a vote on their own proposal. we know the real proposal will not pass the senate. we know that it will not pass the house. my view is that we ought to end saturated and get serious -- that charade and get serious. i've spoken to the president and vice-president within the last hour. if we are now fully engage, the speaker and i, with the one person in america s to consign a bill into law. i am confident and optimistic that we will get an agreement in
the very near future and resolve this crisis in the best interest of the american people. >> a couple of questions. >> mr. speaker, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff is in afghanistan and he was asked whether soldiers will get their checks next week. how can you allow the soldiers to even wonder whether they will get paid? >> senator mcconnell and higher months -- both confident that we can come to an agreement with the white house and in this impasse. -- end this impasse. >> we could have had this bill finished early this past week. there was a bipartisan agreement between myself and the senate leaders to move the underlying bill that will be in moving to
the house yesterday. the president, all he had to do was say yes and that milk -- that bill would have move quickly through both the house and senate. so we have wasted a week we did not need to waste. now we have been driven into this call the second it is time for the president to decide how we are going to get out of it. >> what gives you confidence? >> in spite of our differences, i think we are dealing with a reasonable, responsible people who want this crisis to end as quickly as possible and i am confident that we will. >> let me just that. our country is not going to default for the first time in history. that is not going to happen. we now have a level of seriousness with the right people at the table that we needed and thought we had as the speaker indicated last weekend. we are going to get a result.
>> he said that it will take a bipartisan vote. had you planned to work together with two days left? >> we have worked together for most of the year to try to avoid this. senator reid, senator mcconnell, and i had a solid agreement last sunday. it was the president to do real bad agreement. it is time for the president to tell us what he is for. it is time for the president to outline how we get of this cul- de-sac that he has driven us into. >> could i just -- could i just add? i think we all know that if the president decides to reach an agreement with us, the democrats, most of them, will fall into line. he is the leader of the
democratic party. is the president of the united states. he needs to indicate what he will sign. and we are in those discussions now. [unintelligible] >> i am not going to put any deadlines, but it should be clear to all of you that senator mcconnell and i believe that we're going to be able to come to some agreement to end this crisis as soon as possible. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> following the news conference, senate majority leader reid @ senators called to the floor and challenge the assertion to the majority leader -- by the majority leader that a resolution was soon. this exchange between senator
reid and senator mcconnell is just under 10 minutes. with the president and that a bargain to raise the debt limit is in the works understan and i. mr. president, members. senate, that's not triewvment i just spent two hours with the president, the vic vice preside, and the agreement is not in a meaningful way. the republicans still refuse to negotiate in good faith. revenues off the calendar. no way we can talk about revenues. entitlements, oh, they're after entitlements -- medicare, social security. the speaker and republican leader should know that merely saying you have an agreement in front of television cameras doesn't make it so. the republican leader says he's
engaged. fortunately members of his congress, at least as far as i'm concerned, are more engaged than he is. there are meaningful talks going on with some of his members with my senators. while the republican leader is holding meaningless press conferences, his members are reaching out to me and other members, as i've just indicated. they're coming forward with thoughtful ideas to try to move the process forward. i welcome their ideas and ask all members to continue these discussions. america is watching us and are demanding a result that's balanced. i say to my friend -- and he is my friend, the republican leader -- i'll come to his office, i'll go to the white house with him, ail do anything that i can do to try to move this process forward. but i say, as respectfully as i can to my friend, the senior senator from kentucky, the process has not been moved forward during this day. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the minority leader. the republican leader.
mr. mcconnell: mr. president, the fact of the matter is that the only way we're going to get an agreement before tuesday is to have an agreement with the president of the united states. the only person in america of the 307 million of us who can sign something into law. and i'm more optimistic than my friend, the majority leader. we both talked to the president today. we talked to the vice president several times. i think we've got a chance of getting there. what i think is not helpful is the process we're going through here on the senate floor having a -- show votes over live quorums, having a reluctance on the part of the majority to have a vote on a measure they favor, which we'v we've been prepared o vote on since last night. look, we need to be in a position where all of us in the
leadership can come back here and say that we think we've reached a framework of an agreement that we can recommend to our leaders and be briefing our members. and the sooner we can do that is correct the sooner we can reassure the american people that we're going to get a result on a bipartisan basis. and so that's what i'm working on. and i'm not interested in scoring any political points. i'm interested in getting an outcome for the american people. and the only way that can be done is with the president of the united states. and we're going to continue to work on that, get this problem solved, let everybody in the country know that we're not going to default for the first time in our history. that's how i'm going to spend my time until we get that outcome, that i can come up here and recommend to my colleagues. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: we are here today right now for this reason:
it's spelled f-i-l-b-u-s-t-e-r. it's a filibuster. they won't allow us to have an updarn vote on our amendment. that is filibuster. by the any other term, it is a filibuster. that's why we're here. i hope that the negotiations go on. we're willing to be as fair as we can, but there has to be something that the president and vice president biden and the rest of us think is a step in the right direction. i guess talking is a step in the right direction, but that's about it. so, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the matter that we have before us which is amendment number 589, that we have an up-or-down vote on that, no -- as we have all
the time, of course. there would be no points of order and like we do here all the time. have a vote on it right now. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, reserving the right to object, these are direct quotes from my friend, the majority leader. he says, "in the senate, it's always been the case you need 60 votes. always been the case you need 60 votes." this is the majority leader of the united states senate. for him to suggest that a matter of this magnitude in a body that requires 60 votes for almost everything is going to be done with 51 votes makes no sense at all. i object. mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the objection is heard. the majority leader. mr. reid: it is -- first of all, it is unconscionable that the republicans would filibuster legislation that would put a default on our obleses. it is unprecedented, unprecedented. since 1962 congress has raised the debt limit 74 times,
including 18 times under president reagan and there was never a threat of a filibuster, and it was always by majority vote. mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: mr. president, i might say, i actually cut short a conversation with the vice president to come out here for this important vote on a live quorum. i'd like to get back to work so we can hopefully solve this problem and it seems to me, mr. president, it would be good idea for the majority to decide to allow the vote on the proposal they say they're in favor of. therefore, i would ask unanimous consent that the vote on the pending cloture motion occur at 6:30. mr. reid: i object. the presiding officer: objection is heard. the presiding officer: the majority leader.
mr. reid: mr. president, you can put lipstick on it, a nice siewrkts even a skirt sometimes, it's still a filibuster. >> the senate is also in session discussing the deficit and debt issues. now some of the remarks from the floor debate. we begin with marco rubio and senator from massachusetts. today to speak on the tremendous issue that's captivated and rightfully so the attention of our country. let me start by saying that i do not enjoy or relish the role of attack dog. i never found any fun that that. i don't intend to tbhak here in the snavment i have been here for only seven months but means i haven't been here long enough to think any of the stuff that's going on is normal. i certainly don't think any of the stuff that goes on here too often is normal.
the fact that i've been here seven months has served me well in that regard. washington is full of people from all over the world and all over the country that have traveled here this week to come and watch their government at work and see the monuments of the city and find themselves in the middle of this debate. it is important to remind people what we're debating because although it is an important and difficult issue, it is not hard to understand. the united states of america more or less -- these are rough numbers but accurate -- spends about $300 billion a month. it has $180 billion a month that comes to the federal government through taxes and other sources of reknew and that -- revenue and that means that the senate will come to order to meet its bills, it needs to borrow $120 billion. now, for much of the history of this country, there have been increases in the debt limit and the ability to borrow money. but what has happened over the last few years is that it's no longer a retune vote because the
people who give us our credit rating are saying too much of the money you spend every month is borrowed and we want you to show us how over the next ten years you are going to borrow less as a percentage of what you spend. and so that's why, for years, where the debt limit was routine vote, it no longer can be. it is not something that was made up in some conservative think tank. but the reality that we cannot continue to borrow 40% to 41% of every penny that the government spends has brought us to this point. so you would think that seeing that, our government and our leaders here in both parties would react to that immediately and work on it. and i've heard lot of talk today about delaying votes. i would argue to you that this issue has been delayed at least for the last two and a half years. in the two years before i even came here, neither this -- this chamber neither proposed or passed a budget. it is a startling figure that for the last two years this government has operated without a budget.
the presiding officer: order in the chamber, please. please continue. mr. rubio: so think about that. two years have gone by without a budget. the first tw years that the president was the president, no budgets. some people would say, well, that's because partisanship in washington. well, that's not true. in the two years before i got here, both the house and senate were controlled by members of the democratic party, which are the president's party. in fact, in this chamber for at least one of those two years 60 votes, 60 out of 100 members here caucused with the democrats. 's aas you recall, on christmas -- as you will recall, on christmas eve, they were able to pass a bill. you know how long it has been since this chamber passed a proposed a budget? that's 822 days. a lot of things have happened in the last 822 days. so then we got here in january,
seven months have passed, still no budget. again, not budget passed, proposed, offered. here's our budget. still no budget. 822 days and every single day that i've been here. now, in the last seven days on this debt debate, we have finally seen a proposal from the esteemed senator from nevada, the majority leader. you would think, has he brought it to the floor to vote in not until last night. so, again, offered a proposal over the weekend and still for six days we sat around and what did we do around here? nothing. it was never brought to a vote. you would think these issues would have been worked on in january, february, march -- nothing. this chamber has done nothing. you talk about delay tactics? they've been thraig for two and a half years -- they've been dislaig for two and a half years. the president doesn't have the luxury of some of these things. he has to propose a budget by law, and i d let me tell you how ridiculous the budget was. not a single member of this senate voted for it, including
the democrats. it is a budget that didn't lead to the debt limit. it increased the debt. that's how absurd it was. where is the president plan? we haven't seen it. we haven't seen t here's the president's plan, a blank sheet of paimplet he doesn't have a plan. he hasn't offered a plan. again, if this were a republican president, i would say the same thing. i do not understand how an issue of this magnitude, of generational importance, the president of the united states has not offered a plan. if someone has seen the president's plan, please send to to me because no one else has seen it. it does not exist. so this has been the plan all along, by the way. the plan all along was not to take a position, to let the days count down until we got to this point with 72 hours to go and then force a vote on something that they wanted. i believe that that has been the plan the entire time. and you can see it carrying itself out. you want to know why people all across america get grossed out
about politics? it is by wasmg this kind of thing happen. for today and for much of this time i have seen all these attacks and name-calling. if we had $1 billion for every time i hear the word "tea party extremist," we could solve this debt problem. so all this name-calling -- lelt me read some quotes about this debt limit and i found some pretty extremist quotes. here's one. it says, "the fact that we are here today to debate raising america's debt limit is a sign of leadership's failure. america has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. americans deserve better. i, therefore, intend to oppose ththe to increase america's debt limit." a quhoat from a tea party extremist, right? no. this is a quote from march 16 of 2006 from senator barack obama of illinois. i found another extremist quote. this one says, "because this mass of accumulation of debt was predicted, because it was foreseeable, because it was unnecessary, because it was the result of willful and reckless disregard for the warnings that
were given and for the fundamentals of economic management, i am voting against a debt limit increase. well, that must be from a tea party extremist member of the house, right? no. this is march 16, 2006, from senator joe biden of delaware. last but not least, here's a quote from september 27 of 2007. it sayings, "i find it distaste l and disturbing to increase the debt limit yet again. clearly we need to change course and this debt limit bill is just another reminder of that." and that is from the distinguished senator from nevada, the majority leader. on that date in 2007. and yet now these same quotes in this context, what we're talking about raising the debt limit more than has ever been raised in one vote, is extremism in this name-calling is be a sudden and sets this process back. the other thing i hear -- oh, it is not reasonable. this is a waste of time. this bill can't pass the senate when they talk about the house bill. so now it disqualifies the bill the fact that it can't pass the
senate. well, guess what? the senate bill can't pass in the senate. the senate bill can't pass in the senate. mr. rockefeller: will the senator yield fao a question? mr. rubio: i'll yield. mr. kerry: i thank the senator for doing that. that's become somewhat unusual in the senate today. i truly appreciate it. i would ask the senator, as ironic as it may be that on occasion people in the past have indeed voted against a debt limit -- both republicans and democrats alike -- is it not true that in those situations those votes did not hold the nation hostage, did not come at a moment of enormous economic fragility as we are in today, and did not run the risk of default because it was going to pass overwhelmingly every time? is that not true? mr. rubio: to the senator from massachusetts, i would say two things. the first is that those votes -- put it to you this way. if the senator from illin